This advisory circular provides guidance for all operators using the continuous descent final approach (CDFA)technique while conducting a nonprecision Approach (NPA) procedure. It describes the rationale for using the CDFA Technique, as well as recommended general procedures and training.

This advisory circular (AC) provides an acceptable, but not the only, means to address Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) issues related to installation and use of TCAS II regarding compliance with Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 121, 125, and 129 requirements for air carriers.

On May 7, 2001, the Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review, Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements final rule was published in the Federal Register (FR). It has since been referred to as the 2001 Fuel Tank Safety (FTS) rule. It adopted amendments to part 25, Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) 88 and operating requirements related to SFAR 88. The operating requirements included requirements to implement instructions for continued airworthiness (ICA) that design approval holders (DAH) developed in compliance with SFAR 88. On November 8, 2007, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) published the Enhanced Airworthiness Program for Airplane Systems (EAPAS)/FTS final rule. The purpose of the rule is to help ensure the continued safety of transport category airplanes by improving the design, installation, and maintenance of electrical wiring systems. The EAPAS/FTS rule amended the operating requirements to implement FTS actions developed in accordance with SFAR 88. Integrating the incorporation of the fuel tank system and electrical wiring interconnection system (EWIS) requirements helps to ensure compatibility and to eliminate duplication. Additionally, the EAPAS/FTS rule redesignates (replaces) Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 91, § 91.410(b); part 121, § 121.370(b); part 125, § 125.248(b); and part 129, § 129.32(b) of the FTS rule. The new sections are §§ 91.1507, 121.1113, 125.507 and 129.113. These new rules also clarify language with reference to the approval process of the operator’s program. This advisory circular (AC) only addresses the fuel tank system safety requirements and describes acceptable means of compliance (AMC) accordingly. The current edition of AC 120-102, Incorporation of Electrical Wiring Interconnection Systems Instructions for Continued Airworthiness into an Operator’s Maintenance Program, addresses EWIS requirements in the EAPAS/FTS rule.

The Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996 (PRIA), as amended, was enacted to ensure that air carriers and air operators adequately investigate a pilot’s background before allowing that pilot to conduct commercial air carrier flights. Under PRIA, a hiring employer cannot place a pilot into service until he or she obtains and reviews the last 5 years of the pilot’s background and other safety-related records as specified in PRIA.

This advisory circular (AC) is supplemented by the current edition of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Order 8000.88, PRIA Guidance for FAA Inspectors, and numerous other documents found on the PRIA Web site at http://www.faa.gov/pilots/lic_cert/pria. These sources of detailed information related to PRIA provide invaluable assistance to the certificate holder or others concerning the PRIA request process as well as other compliance issues.

The FAA has greatly expanded this AC from the previous version to address operational situations that the hiring employer may encounter that could affect his or her records request process through PRIA.

The Flight Standards Service (AFS) is committed to a stakeholder-driven system of operation that will deliver FAA records and assistance to all parties subject to PRIA, when necessary.

This advisory circular (AC) provides information and describes an acceptable means of compliance (AMC) with the Reduction of Fuel Tank Flammability in Transport Category Airplanes, final rule. It is commonly called the Fuel Tank Flammability Reduction (FTFR) rule. This AC describes acceptable means, but not the only means, for demonstrating compliance with the applicable regulations. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) will consider other methods of demonstrating compliance that an applicant may elect to present. While these guidelines are not mandatory, they are derived from extensive FAA and industry experience in determining compliance with the relevant regulations. If the FAA becomes aware of circumstances that convince us that following this AC would not result in compliance with the applicable regulations, the FAA may require additional substantiation or design changes as a basis for finding compliance. This material does not change or create any additional regulatory requirements, nor does it authorize changes in or permit deviations from existing regulatory requirements.

The information contained in this advisory circular (AC) was developed based on a review of recommended practices developed by major airplane manufacturers, labor organizations, air carriers, training organizations, simulator manufacturers, and industry representative organizations. This AC does not provide guidance for full aerodynamic stall training, which industry and government stakeholders are now developing. Once developed, this AC will be revised to include that guidance.

The goal of this AC is to provide best practices and guidance for training, testing, and checking for pilots, within existing regulations, to ensure correct and consistent responses to unexpected stall warnings and stick pusher activations. This AC emphasizes reducing the angle of attack (AOA) at the first indication of a stall as the primary means of approach-to-stall or stall recovery. Additionally, this AC provides guidance for operators and training centers in the development of stall and stick pusher event training.

Advisory Circular 120-26K defines the criteria and procedures for obtaining an International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) three-letter identifier and/or telephony designator assignment and for obtaining an FAA Special or Local telephony/call sign.

This advisory circular (AC) explains what the term "maintenance program" means. Our explanation describes the scope and content of air carrier aircraft maintenance programs. This is important as there is a significant difference between an air carrier maintenance program and an inspection program used in non-air carrier maintenance operations. We explain the background of these programs as well as the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) regulatory requirements. We also describe and explain each of the 10 elements of air carrier maintenance programs. When we use "must" or "will" in this AC, we are referencing actual regulatory requirements. When we use "we," "us," or "our" in this AC, we mean the FAA. When we use "you," "your," or "yours," we mean you, the air carrier. When we use the term "person," it has the same meaning as that in Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 1, § 1.1.

This advisory circular (AC) establishes guidelines for U.S. operators to use when reviewing Foreign Terminal Instrument Procedures (FTIP). Occasionally, the author uses the word "must" or similar language when he deems the desired actions critical. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) does not intend for the use of such language to add to, interpret, or relieve a duty imposed by Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR).

(1) Describes the basic concepts of Fatigue Risk Management Systems (FRMS), as prescribed in Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 117, § 117.7, and how they relate to aviation industry employees safely performing their duties.

(2) Provides information on the components of an FRMS as applied to aviation, and on how to implement an FRMS within an aviation operation.

(3) Defines an FRMS as an operator-specific process; therefore, while all FRMSs will have common elements, the specifics will be tailored to a certificate holder’s particular conditions.

a. Evaluating Manufactured or Modified Aircraft. It provides a means but not the only means of evaluating manufactured or modified aircraft by the use of standard systems, processes, and tests necessary to determine pilot training and qualification requirements.

b. Differences in Training and Qualification between Aircraft. It describes an acceptable means, but not the only means, of compliance with applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) that provide for differences in training and qualification between aircraft with the same type certificate. It further describes an acceptable means for providing related aircraft differences training and qualification under provision of 14 CFR part 121 between aircraft with different type certificates that have been "designated" by the Administrator as related. Both of these processes use the provision of the Flight Standardization Board (FSB) report as the basis for the approval of pilot training and qualification necessary for the operation of aircraft. This AC is intended to enhance safety by:

This joint Flight Standards Service (AFS) and Aircraft Certification Service (AIR) advisory circular (AC) contains guidance on the operational use of Electronic Flight Bags (EFBs). It is intended for all operators conducting flight operations under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121, 125, 135, or 91 subpart F (part 91F) and part 91 subpart K (part 91K) who want to replace required paper information or utilize other select functions of an EFB. This AC sets forth an acceptable means, but not the only means, to obtain Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) authorization for the operational use of EFBs. Part 91 operators can find additional EFB information in the current edition of AC 91-78, Use of Class 1 or Class 2 Electronic Flight Bag (EFB). For guidance on the installation of EFB components, refer to the current edition of AC 20-173, Installation of Electronic Flight Bag Components.

This advisory circular (AC) provides basic background information and links to sources of more detailed information that can be used to improve air carrier programs that inform crewmembers about in-flight ionizing radiation exposure.

This advisory circular (AC) updates information regarding the hazards and risks of in-flight fires on transport category aircraft. The information includes recommended crewmember procedures and training for combating in-flight fires. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued Safety Recommendations A-11-87 through A-11-91 during the investigation of United Parcel Service (UPS) flight 6 accident on September 3, 2010 in the United Arab Emirates. The flightcrew encountered a "Fire Main Deck" master warning about 22 minutes into the flight; they declared an emergency and initiated a return to Dubai International Airport (DXB). The aircraft crashed inside an Emirate army post 9 miles from DXB, and both flightcrew members were fatally injured. NTSB findings revealed safety issues related to the training and use of oxygen mask; communicating with oxygen masks donned; and oxygen mask stowage and the smoke, fire, or fumes checklists. This revision to AC 120-80 is in response to NTSB recommendations A-11-88 through A-11-90.

This advisory circular (AC) describes the recommended training for airplane Upset Prevention and Recovery Training (UPRT). The goal of this AC is to provide recommended practices and guidance for academic and flight simulation training device (FSTD) training for pilots to prevent developing upset conditions and ensure correct recovery responses to upsets. The AC was created from recommended practices developed by major airplane manufacturers, labor organizations, air carriers, training organizations, simulator manufacturers, and industry representative organizations. This AC provides guidance to Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121 air carriers implementing the regulatory requirements of §§ 121.419, 121.423, 121.424, and 121.427. Although this AC is directed to air carriers to implement part 121 regulations, the FAA encourages all airplane operators, pilot schools, and training centers to implement UPRT and to use this guidance, as applicable to the type of airplane in which training is conducted.

Although a stall is by definition an upset, stall prevention and recovery training is contained in the current edition of AC 120-109, Stall Prevention and Recovery Training.

This advisory circular (AC) provides operators with recommended procedures for managing cargo operations. Developing and using these comprehensive procedures is key to establishing a safe and efficient cargo operation. The AC provides guidance for aircraft cargo loading systems (CLS), restraints, special cargo, and unit load devices (ULD)This AC is not mandatory and does not constitute a regulation. This AC describes an acceptable means, but not the only means, of complying with applicable regulations to manage cargo operations.

The terms must and will are used in this AC to reflect regulatory requirements.

When this AC uses suggestive and permissive language (e.g., should and may), it is used to describe recommended or acceptable means, but not the only means, to comply with this AC.

This advisory circular (AC) provides guidance for the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) standard for a Liquid Water Equivalent System (LWES). This AC applies to anyone proposing to design, procure, construct, install, activate, or maintain an LWES. An LWES is an automated weather measurement system that determines the Liquid Water Equivalent (LWE) rate in conditions of frozen or freezing precipitation. The LWE rate is used by the system with the appropriate endurance time (ET) regression equations and regression coefficients specified in an FAA-approved current database at http://66.46.192.186/RegressionInformation.html to determine the holdover time (HOT) or check time (CT) for an aircraft’s applied anti-icing fluid (Society of Automotive Engineer (SAE) Types I, II, III, and IV). Thus, the LWES incorporates a Holdover Time Determination System (HOTDS) or Check Time Determination System (CTDS). The HOT is used to determine how long a fluid would provide protection assuming that the current conditions do not change. The CT is used to determine the fluid’s current protection capability, while incorporating varying weather conditions.

Government Sites

Contact Us

This page was originally published at: http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.list/parentTopicID/140/display/current/changeNumber/0/sortResults/1/currentPage/3/sortColumn/dateIssued/sortOrder/ASC